Whose English Does the New Headway Upper-Intermediate Global Coursebook Spread?

(1)

Université de Liège

Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres

Département de Langues et Littératures Modernes

Whose English Does the New Headway Upper-Intermediate

Global Coursebook Spread?

Mémoire présenté par Laura Gerday en vue de l‟obtention du grade de Master en langues et littératures modernes, orientation générale, à finalité approfondie.

Sous la direction de Madame Daria Tunca

Lectrices :

Madame Lieselotte Brems

Madame Bénédicte Ledent

(2)

(3)

Université de Liège

Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres

Département de Langues et Littératures Modernes

Whose English Does the New Headway Upper-Intermediate

Global Coursebook Spread?

Mémoire présenté par Laura Gerday en vue de l‟obtention du grade de Master en langues et littératures modernes, orientation générale, à finalité approfondie.

Sous la direction de Madame Daria Tunca

Lectrices :

Madame Lieselotte Brems

Madame Bénédicte Ledent

(4)

Acknowledgements

The present MA thesis would not have been shaped without Dr Daria Tunca‟s careful supervision and constant support. The frequent discussions which were held with Dr Tunca throughout the last 2 academic years have undeniably stimulated reflections on the nature and use of the English language. I am also deeply indebted for help to Dr François Provenzano, who encouraged me to investigate the matter of ELT global coursebooks, Dr Germain Simons, whose information about the New Headway collection of textbooks was extremely useful, and Dr Rebecca Romdhani, along with a friend of hers, who agreed to identify various accents of English.

Furthermore, I wish to take this opportunity to thank all the professors from the Universities of Liège and Leeds who contributed, either directly or indirectly, to this dissertation through their lectures on English linguistics, literature, and education. I am moreover grateful to my friend Alexis Bellens, who shared with me his experience as a Belgian French-speaking English teacher using the New Headway Student’s Book daily. Finally, I am thankful for my relatives‟ unfailing support, owing eternal gratitude to my twin brother in particular, Martin, who cheered me up while facing the same demanding task of writing a Master‟s thesis.

(5)

Introduction

1. Background to this MA Thesis

In 2012, as an Erasmus student at the University of Leeds, England, I chose to attend a first-semester course given by Professors Martin Lamb and James Simpson from the School of Education. As can be inferred from the title of the class, “Globalisation, Identity and English Language Education”, this third-year module aimed to highlight the connection between language and identity within a speech community, as well as the manner in which the worldwide spread of English Language Teaching and Learning in the context of globalisation currently affects this link. The description of the course read as follows:

This module should appeal to students of English or modern languages with an interest in how languages are learned and taught. Its starting point is the belief that language is an integral part of individual and community identity, and the spread of English, amongst other linguistic features of globalization, is giving rise to tensions and dilemmas in the UK and other national settings that demand attention from anyone involved in language education. (Lamb and Simpson, 2012)

Throughout the 11 seminars, issues such as English as a Lingua Franca, learner motives and identity, language and culture, traditional and contemporary teaching practices, English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL), language education, migration and citizenship were repeatedly addressed (Lamb and Simpson, 2012). The final session, which took place in December 2012, was devoted to a sensitive

subject in the field of English Language Education, a topic which has been my obsession for approximately 2 years and a half. On that Friday morning, several

copies of the New Headway Intermediate Fourth Edition Student’s Book were

distributed to pairs of students in addition to a handout whose heading read “A Critical Look at English Language Teaching Materials” (Lamb, 2012). Among

the various questions listed in the document, 3 caught my attention. These were “What countries/cultures are represented [in the textbook]?”, “What kind of people are included/excluded?”, and “What kind of topics are discussed/ignored?” (Lamb, 2012). When attempting to answer them, I realised that the type of coursebook which I had used for 4 years at secondary school to learn English provided an approach to the language which was far from neutral. Before doing this exercise, I had hardly

(8)

6 ever questioned the ideas and beliefs communicated by means of the New Headway teaching materials. Neither had I thought that a biased conception of the world could be conveyed by a textbook intended for learners of English. I later understood that the view of language which I had supported as a secondary-school and undergraduate student corresponded to what Paul Simpson and Andrea Mayr call a “liberal” one (2010, p. 4). Indeed, I would have argued a few years ago that “texts” were “natural outcomes of the free communicative interplay between individuals in society, uninhibited by political or ideological influence” (Simpson and Mayr, 2010, p. 4). This assumption of mine was undermined by a quote from John Gray‟s “The Global Coursebook in English Language Teaching” reproduced in the second section of the handout:

[C]oursebooks are commodities to be traded, but what they contain is the result of the interplay between at times contradictory commercial, pedagogic and ethical interests. ELT [English Language Teaching] publishers may be said to present a vision of the world in the texts they produce. (2002 quoted in Lamb, 2012)

Connecting this quotation to the aforementioned questions, I finally discovered the concrete consequences of a notion which I had regarded so far as obscure and exclusively theoretical. Ideology was not a simple set of beliefs belonging to the upper spheres of abstraction. Ideology could take the shape of a seemingly trivial object such as a textbook and permeate our everyday lives. What the exercise devised by Professor Lamb therefore enabled me to understand was Simpson and Mayr‟s view of language, according to which “[it] is influenced by ideology and […] all texts, whether spoken or written, and even visual language, are inexorably shaped and determined by a web of political beliefs and socio-cultural practices” (2010, p. 4).1 More importantly, I was surprised to observe that I had needed such a task to become aware of the power of language. Leaving the classroom at the end of this seminar, I wondered why I had taken the content of the New Headway coursebook for granted for all these years. It is only 10 months later, as I attended my first Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Stylistics course in Liège, that I was given an answer. In the introduction to Critical Stylistics: The Power of English, Lesley Jeffries asserts that a major concept related to CDA is “naturalization” (2010,

1_{Ideology, in Simpson and Mayr‟s book as well as in this dissertation, corresponds to “the ways in} which a person‟s beliefs, opinions and value-systems intersect with the broader social and political structures of the society in which they live” (2010, p. 4).

(9)

7 p. 9). As the linguist puts it, “some ideology may be „naturalized‟ to the extent that it becomes „common sense‟ to members of the community” (2010, p. 9). In other words, the discourse conveyed by the New Headway textbook is so deeply ingrained in the white middle-class portion of the Western society to which I belong that it may go unnoticed. Crucial questions then sprang to mind. Had I been somehow shaped by this discourse, and if so, in what ways? What are the main political, social, and cultural ideas underlying it? Can these beliefs be spotted although they are “naturalized”? How may I detect them since I appear to share the same vision of the world as that embedded in the teaching materials cited above? The issue undoubtedly aroused my interest and gave me food for thought. I consequently chose to investigate the matter thoroughly in my MA thesis, in respect of the New Headway coursebook which I had cursorily examined at the University of Leeds. Since the research is concerned with an English language textbook, it must perforce start with a few words on the current status of English as a global language.

2. Contextualising the Issue

Consulting diverse quality newspapers, scholarly journals and books, one soon realises that finding the exact number of current speakers of English around the globe is a difficult – or, indeed, impossible – task. Jennifer Jenkins, in her 2015 Global Englishes: A Resource Book for Students, estimates that roughly 360 million people nowadays speak English as a Native Language (ENL), approximately 360 million belong to the group of speakers of English as a Second Language (ESL), and about 2 billion people use English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) (pp. 10-11). Of course, these recent figures are far from indisputable. Not only do they constantly change, but they also depend on the level of linguistic competence which is believed to define a “speaker” and the type of English which is taken into account. By way of illustration, English-based pidgins and creoles are not included in Jenkins‟ ENL or ESL categories (2015, p. 11), whereas other linguists, such as David Crystal, prefer to add them to their estimations (2012, pp. 62-69). What the figures however clearly demonstrate in all cases is that the body of native speakers has been largely outnumbered by the non-native users of the language. In fact, the demand for English Language Teaching and Learning has not ceased to

(10)

8 increase (Buckledee, 2010, p. 141) and, as a result, ELT publishing has become “a growing and highly competitive industry” (Gray, 2002, p. 155).

Calculating the total number of people who learn English today appears to be an equally insoluble problem. Nonetheless, tendencies exist and have been studied in relation to particular territories. For example, Steve Buckledee, relying on Kirkpatrick‟s 2006 figures, states that Chinese learners of English are more numerous than the British, American, and Australian native speakers of the language combined (2010, p. 141). Furthermore, it is worth emphasising that non-native speakers at present most often use English in order to interact with other non-native speakers of the language (2010, p. 142). In this perspective, some scholars working in the fields of applied linguistics and ELT, among whom Adolphs (2005), Gray (2010b), Seidlhofer (2011), and Jenkins (2015), have lately raised a pivotal issue: which type of English do non-native speakers need to learn? Is ENL still a relevant linguistic model to teach?

Over the past 15 years, a lot of research has been carried out into English as a Lingua Franca – that is, English used by people who speak different mother tongues in order to interact (Crystal, 2003, p. 464). Jennifer Jenkins and Barbara Seidlhofer appear to have been most prolific in the past few years. The former compiled a list of all the phonemes which are thought to be necessary for intelligible communication between English users of various mother tongues in the “Lingua Franca Core” (see Gnutzmann and Intemann, 2005, p. 18). The latter has analysed the salient lexicogrammatical features of English as a Lingua Franca on the basis of the spoken ELF corpus VOICE (Seidlhofer, 2004). Both linguists belong to the editorial board of the Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, whose first issue was published in March 2012 (De Gruyter, 2015). Special attention has been paid to ELF because it is considered by many researchers to be a linguistic system which suits English learners‟ needs (Jenkins, 2015, p. 155). In its latest definition, ELF is precisely glossed as “any use of English among speakers of different first languages for whom English is the communicative medium of choice, and often the only option” (Seidlhofer, 2011, her italics, quoted in Jenkins, 2015, p. 44). Striking is that, in contrast with English as a Foreign Language, the native speaker is here no longer the “yardstick against which [non-native speakers‟] use is measured” (2015, p. 45). In fact, intercultural communication being the prime objective of ELF, “differences

(11)

9 from native English that achieve this are regarded not as deficiencies but as evidence of linguistic adaptability and creativity” (2015, p. 45).2

Recurring “differences” from ENL thus constitute the features defining ELF which, in Gray‟s opinion, establish “a norm in its own right – appropriate for a different kind of speaker who does not wish be [sic] constructed as an ersatz „native speaker‟ ” (2010b, p. 182).

Despite considerable research and growing interest, ELF does not seem to have gained full acceptance in the ELT industry yet as the native speaker tends to remain the custodian of the norm and the model to mimic. This conclusion was reached in particular by Buckledee (2010) and Gray (2010b) after investigating the content of several ELT coursebooks. The object of their studies is worth stressing because

[t]extbooks, for better or worse, dominate what students learn. They set the curriculum, and often the facts learned, in most subjects. […] The public regards textbooks as authoritative, accurate, and necessary. And teachers rely on them to organize lessons and structure subject matter. (A. Graham Down quoted in Apple, 1992, p. 6, my emphasis)

The English language textbooks which were selected by Buckledee and Gray – for instance Straightforward, Total English (2010, p. 145), Streamline Connections, and Building Strategies (2010b, p. 55) – are included in a subcategory of ELT teaching materials known as global coursebooks (2010b, p. 1). In Gray‟s terms, a “global coursebook” labels the “financially lucrative and widely disseminated UK-produced [ELT textbook]” which is part of “an incremental English language course designed for the global market” (2010b, p. 1). These resources, which heavily influence English courses, are therefore especially intended for a large and geographically diverse audience of learners. Buckledee wished to discover in this respect whether some “concessions to English as a Lingua Franca” could be identified in a series of language textbooks (2010, p. 144). Unfortunately, he concluded, the gap between what learners of English are thought to need (ELF) and what they are taught (ENL) remains wide (2010, p. 141). In a similar vein, Vettorel and Lopriore, who examined

the content of the 10 best-selling English textbooks in Italy, contended that the linguistic reference point did not show any shift towards ELF (2013, p. 497). By contrast, the settings in which certain learning activities took place were no longer essentially British or American but “focused on other parts of the world”

2_{The concept of intercultural communication will be described and discussed further in this} dissertation.

(12)

10 (2013, p. 496). Gray had already made an identical remark after analysing the 1996 New Headway Intermediate Student’s Book (2002, p. 157). To his mind, the attention paid to “international settings reflect[ed], no doubt, a growing sense on the part of the publishers of English as an increasingly global language” (2002, p. 157). Vettorel, Lopriore, and Gray‟s common observation alludes to a major bone of contention in ELT, which is the relevance of culture in global coursebooks. It is indeed often assumed that language is tied to culture, the former expressing, embodying, and symbolising the latter (Kramsch, 1998, p. 3). As a consequence, learning a language necessarily implies learning its related culture (Hinkel, 1999, pp. 2-7). In the case of a widely used contact language such as English, a key question arises: to which culture(s) should it be linked? Some scholars, among whom Claire Kramsch and Michael Byram, maintain that the native speaker‟s environment has to be part of the cultural background of English learning (see Hinkel, 1999, pp. 2-7), whereas others, such as Vivian Cook, assert that culture teaching in the context of a lingua franca is not pertinent (see Vettorel, 2010, p. 157). Another group of scholars brings together those who support the view that various “non-native” cultures should be taken into account in ELT teaching materials. Anna Niżegorodcew, for example, states that “proficient non-native and minority English language speakers should provide […] appropriate models of those who promote their own cultures while using English” (2011, pp. 10-11).

As detailed below, my dissertation is designed to reassess the views on the ELT global coursebook expressed by these scholars. Using the 2014 edition of the New Headway Upper-Intermediate Student’s Book, I argue that a shift towards international settings in an English language textbook does not inevitably entail a non-Anglocentric perspective on English and culture.

3. Objectives and Methodology of the Research

The present MA thesis principally consists in studying the linguistic models on which the New Headway (hereafter NH) English course is based. The analysis of a volume in this collection of ELT coursebooks is intended to reveal whether its content is consistent with the current needs of English language learners, which converge towards non-native speaker/non-native speaker communication skills.

(13)

11 In this perspective, I will first attempt to discover whether the language which is taught in the selected NH textbook is still exclusively ENL, or presents some features of non-native English. Indeed, “[a]ny move towards an [ELF] model is likely to be a step-by-step process of change rather than a sudden switch” (Buckledee, 2010, p. 144). Although the research question which is at the core of this thesis – namely Whose English Does the New Headway Upper-Intermediate Global Coursebook Spread? – revolves around a linguistic issue, culture is also central to this study. In fact, owing to the assumed connection between language (learning) and culture (teaching), I will then endeavour to identify the cultural framework with which the linguistic models of the course are associated. In the same vein, I will investigate whether this framework remains predominantly British/American-centred, or whether it emphasises a multicultural approach to English learning. In so doing, I also plan to highlight some of the values and beliefs underlying the NH course, hypothesising their potential impact on the learner‟s conception of the phrases “the English language” and “speakers of English”. Indeed, the investigation aims to contribute to an understanding of the reasons why ELF has not gained full acceptance in the ELT industry as yet, and the meanings to which ENL is tied might prevent the switch to a non-native speaker model of English in this category of teaching materials.

As mentioned above, the study is centred on one particular global coursebook – the New Headway Upper-Intermediate Student’s Book (hereafter NH SB) – which is

the mainstay of the NH course upon which other NH teaching resources (the Teacher’s Book and the Workbook) rely. While the learner‟s perspective will be

focused on, the keys and notes included in the Teacher’s Book will be taken into consideration, as they are of paramount importance to understanding the linguistic and cultural approach adopted in NH SB. Furthermore, I opted for the fourth and latest edition of NH so as to find out about the authors‟ and publishers‟ most recent standpoints and choices regarding ELT. As far as the level of competence is concerned, I decided to study an upper-intermediate textbook, which is commonly used in the final years of secondary school.3

3

(14)

12 From a methodological point of view, it is worth indicating that a coursebook can be analysed at 3 levels: content, consumption, and production (Harwood, 2014, p. 2). The first refers to “what textbooks include and exclude in terms of topic, linguistic information, pedagogy, and culture” when they are viewed as entities isolated from the classroom context (2014, p. 2). By contrast, the level of consumption is precisely concerned with the manner in which “teachers and learners use textbooks” (2014, p. 2). The “processes by which textbooks are shaped, authored, and distributed” are the focal point of the third level (2014, p. 2). My research, however, will cover the first dimension only. Because I am not a didactics student, and, as will be explained further in this thesis, because I did not manage to contact the authors and the Oxford University Press publishers of NH, I was not in a position to examine the levels of consumption and production. As a result, the study will concentrate on NH SB as a finished product of the British ELT industry which is about to be consumed by learners with various profiles.

Besides, I intend to use linguistic concepts as a shovel to unearth some of the beliefs and assumptions embedded in the English models of NH SB. I concur with John Thompson, who suggests that

[t]he theory of ideology and the study of language are two concerns which bear a close connection. For the theory of ideology has commonly sought to examine the ways in which “meaning” or “ideas” affect the conceptions or activities of the individuals and groups which make up the social world. While the nature and modalities of ideology have been analysed in different ways, it seems increasingly clear that the study of language must occupy a privileged position in any such analysis. (1984 quoted in Richardson, 1987, p. 361)

In contrast with earlier research in the field of ELT global textbooks whose focus was almost exclusively culture (see Chapter I), I prefer to select an innovative method, favouring a chiefly linguistic and qualitative angle on the matter. Since ideology and language are strongly linked to each other, readers should also bear in mind that this dissertation cannot be considered to be objective and neutral. It cannot be ignored that this thesis is written by a student who is herself caught up in a web of particular meanings and ideas (see Richardson, 1987, p. 368). Consequently, the linguistic diagnosis of the NH course can only be valid “within [the] framework of cultural knowledge” to which I belong (1987, p. 367). It is indeed vital to point out

(15)

13 that some other beliefs which are intertwined with NH SB may be revealed by scholars who are part of different cultures. In addition, I do not claim to conduct a comprehensive study of the textbook; as specified below, this dissertation corresponds to a reflection on its content which covers few chapters.

4. Organisation of the Study

The thesis consists of 5 chapters. Following this introduction, Chapter I provides

some background information which is essential to grasp the notions of the “textbook” in general and the “language coursebook” in particular. It

subsequently reviews the ELT literature devoted to the global textbook and the major findings from related empirical research which generated the question at the core of this dissertation. By identifying the gaps in these findings, I clarify at the same time

the aspects of NH SB which will be examined and narrow the scope of my investigation.

As a hinge between theory and practice, Chapter II briefly introduces the NH series of ELT coursebooks. It principally aims to collect general information on the course before an in-depth study of its content is conducted. The main findings of this investigation are presented in Chapter III and Chapter IV. The former includes the results of the qualitative and quantitative analysis of phonology, grammar, and lexis in NH SB, while the latter contains the ones of the study concerned with the salient cultural aspects of the course. Although separate, these chapters are complementary as the interaction between all the findings is also considered. Finally, because conclusions are gradually drawn in respect of the initial research question,

Chapter V only groups some perspectives on the nature, the role, and the future of

(16)

14

I. Literature Review

1. Introduction

Chapter I can be regarded as a toolbox that includes the topics and concepts which

are useful to conduct this study. The upper tote tray of this toolkit contains the generic notion of the “textbook”: indeed, before getting to the heart of the matter

– namely the global coursebook – one has to concentrate on the intrinsic characteristics of the textbook first.4 In accordance with the scope of this thesis, emphasis is principally laid on the nature of the teaching and learning resource whereas its functions – essentially related to the classroom environment – are covered only briefly. Attention will gradually shift from the coursebook in general (2) and zoom in on the language textbook. In this second section (3), the issue pertaining to the relationship between language and culture, and its current effects upon language education will predominantly be addressed. Finally, the third part of this chapter (4) consists in describing the ELT global textbook in connection with the language-culture link: its content will first be defined from a cultural point of view, and ultimately from a linguistic perspective.

2. The Textbook

“No teaching-learning situation, it seems, is complete until it has its relevant textbook”, write Hutchinson and Torres (1994, p. 315). This sort of material, in other words, appears a key component of education. In fact, looking up the definition of a coursebook, one primarily comes across metaphors which reflect the major roles it plays in this field. McGrath cites the terms “recipe”, “springboard”, “straightjacket”, “supermarket”, “holy book”, “compass”, “survival kit”, and “crutch” (2002 quoted in Richards, 2014, p. 19). In a less figurative sense, Cunningsworth refers to “resource”, “(reference) source”, and “support” (1995, p. 5). The textbook, to sum up, tends to be described first and foremost as an educational tool (Gray, 2013a, p. 7). As can be inferred from this wide diversity of images,

4_{Following the example of Garton and Graves (2014, p. 12), Tomlinson (2011, xi) and Harwood} (2014, p. 1), I intend to use the words “textbook” and “coursebook” interchangeably throughout this dissertation.

(17)

15 it ranges from an object which is at the service of learners and teachers to one which is their master (Cunningsworth, 1995, p. 5). The degree of teachers‟ dependence on materials, especially coursebooks, to organise their lessons even became a hotly debated issue at the dawn of the 1980s and retained this controversial status until the 1990s (Hutchinson and Torres, 1994). Some offered to limit the role of teaching materials, considering them to be resources whose aim was not to determine but rather to contribute to the content of a course (Allwright, 1981; Cunningsworth, 1995). Others advanced that a textbook was a necessary medium, “the most convenient means of providing the structure that the teaching-learning system […] requires” (Hutchinson and Torres, 1994, p. 317). Talking about ELT specifically, O‟Neill assumed that “learners who do not work from textbooks may be being deprived of a useful medium of orientation and study outside the classroom” (1982, p. 104). My prime concern here is not to settle the question debated by these scholars; rather, I wish to stress that, in those days, the coursebook was chiefly

analysed from a pedagogical point of view, and defined as a tool involved to a greater or lesser extent in the teaching-learning process.

It is the last decade of the 20th century which was marked by new considerations in the description of the textbook. Scholars‟ attention was no longer focused on its functions and use in the classroom; the nature, production, and content of a coursebook also turned out to be worth investigating (Apple, 1992). An influential

article in this respect is Michael W. Apple‟s “The Text and Cultural Politics”, in which the education theorist opted for the term “artifact” to characterise the textbook (1992, pp. 4-5). Anticipating the quote from Gray‟s “The Global

Coursebook in English Language Teaching” found in Martin Lamb‟s handout (2012), Apple in fact contends that texts, thus textbooks, “are the simultaneous results of political, economic, and cultural activities, battles, and compromises”, adding that they “are conceived, designed, and authored by real people with real interests [and] published within the political and economic constraints of markets, resources, and power” (1992, p. 4). By means of the noun “artifact”, the accent is definitely on the impact of textbook production on the content of such teaching

materials, the cursor steadily moving away from an exclusive focus on the consumption pole (Harwood, 2014, p. 2). From now on coursebooks would also

(18)

16 constructions of reality, particular ways of selecting and organizing that vast universe of possible knowledge” (Apple, 1992, p. 5, his italics). From now on coursebooks would also be viewed as the products and the carriers of political and cultural beliefs, among others. A sign of this shift in the field of ELT is detected in an article written by Cortazzi and Jin (1999). After identifying textbooks as cultural mirrors (1999, p. 196), the linguists list 7 words which are said to correspond to the features underlying EFL materials (1999, pp. 199-201). Unsurprisingly, a coursebook can operate “on several levels” as a teacher, a map, a resource, a trainer, an authority, or a de-skiller as it may reduce teachers‟ creativity (1999, pp. 199-200). Crucial is the seventh term completing the series, which is not listed above. Cortazzi and Jin indeed maintain that the textbook can be regarded as ideology too because “it reflects a worldview or cultural system, a social construction that may be imposed on teachers and students and that indirectly constructs their view of a culture”, specifying that “[t]his aspect often passes unrecognized” (1999, p. 200). What emerges is that, as far as ELT is concerned, the noun “ideology” made its way into the literature devoted to the concept of the coursebook, and became an integral part of its description.

Apple‟s work, including “Textbook Publishing: The Political and Economic Influences” (1989) and The Politics of the Textbook edited in collaboration with Linda K. Christian-Smith (1991), has undeniably had a considerable impact on the development of the ELT discipline (e.g. Gray, 2010b; Harwood, 2014). The light which he shed on the essence of coursebooks has notably penetrated the work of a prominent researcher who has already been mentioned several times in this thesis – John Gray. The scholar indeed takes the view that “the ELT industry is an area of applied linguistics activity in which politics and political economy clearly come together” as teaching is “a highly politicised activity” and “commercially produced materials exert a powerful influence over what takes place in many classrooms around the world” (2013a, p. 11). Moreover, besides using the word “artefact” (Gray, 2000; 2013a, pp. 2-5), both Apple and Gray label textbooks as commodities (Apple, 1989, p. 282; 1992, p. 6; Gray, 2002, p. 157; 2013a, pp. 7-10), which highlights once again the coursebooks‟ production phase. It is no wonder, then, as the last quote shows, that “ELT” and “industry” tend to co-occur (e.g. Gray, 2002, p. 155; Littlejohn, 2011, p. 180). Littlejohn similarly argues that

(19)

17 although materials are aimed at use inside a classroom, they will always bear the hallmarks of the conditions of their production outside the classroom.

This is particularly the case with materials which are produced in a commercial context, where the need to maximise sales, satisfy shareholders,

and achieve corporate goals may have a direct impact on the design of materials, quite distinct from their pedagogic intent. (2012, his italics, quoted in Gray, 2013a, p. 7)

Harwood, who gives a detailed overview of recent ELT coursebook research, also underlines the main consequence of the emphasis placed on the production and content poles: the manner in which English language textbooks are consumed today tends to be neglected in this field of study (2014, p. 11). In contrast with mainstream – non-ELT – education, there are indeed “relatively few studies exploring how ELT teachers and students use textbooks inside and outside the classroom” (Harwood, 2014, p. 11). Gray deplores, for instance, “the scarcity of research on teachers‟ thinking with regard to materials”, and calls on fellow scholars to investigate which meanings such materials may have for students in the classroom context (2010b, p. 190). Their appeal to correct this imbalance in ELT does not seem to have fallen on deaf ears. By way of illustration, Sue Garton and Kathleen Graves edited last year International Perspectives on Materials in ELT, which “focuses not only on materials but on their use, not only by teachers but also by learners” (2014, p. 2). To stress the importance of the consumption phase in ELT textbook research, Garton and Graves claim that “[a]ny view of materials that neglects their actual use by teachers and/or learners can […] only be partial” (2014, p. 2). Although I am in agreement with the researchers on this point, I am above all of the opinion that it is first imperative to know well what teachers and learners use before observing how they consume materials. As hinted at above, one aspect of ELT coursebooks has not been thoroughly explored yet; it is one of the main constituent parts of contemporary foreign language textbooks which now deserve attention.

3. The Language Coursebook

Keeping up-to-date with topical issues in textbook research seems virtually inconceivable. Readers should consequently be warned that what follows is not a comprehensive account of the latest articles and books related to the present subject

(20)

18 matter, but rather a selection. On the basis of these chosen sources, it appears that a language coursebook is not only fundamentally characterised by a linguistic dimension, but is also heavily dependent on a cultural one (Cunningsworth, 1995; Gray, 2000; 2002). The latter belongs to what is sometimes termed the “hidden curriculum”, which consists of “the image of life presented by coursebooks, the attitudes they convey, consciously or unconsciously, and the social and cultural values that they communicate” (Cunningsworth, 1995, p. 86). In Gray‟s work, the words “cultural” and “artefact” even appear to form a collocation (2000; 2010b, p. 3; 2013a, pp. 2-5). Culture, Cunningsworth again insists, has to be taken into consideration in the language learning process because it is part of language use:

Although language coursebooks are primarily a means for facilitating language learning, they cannot simply do that and no more, because language is used in real situations for real purposes. A study of a language solely as an abstract system would not equip learners to use it in the real world. As a consequence, coursebooks must and do represent language as it is actually used and therefore they contain subject matter and deal with topics of various kinds. (1995, p. 86)

Two leading proponents of this theory in the same period were Michael Byram (1989; et al., 1994) and Claire Kramsch (1993). The former likewise asserts that

[w]hat has become more evident in recent decades is that language learning is insufficient; it leads to encoding of a message rather than communication and interaction with another person. There can be no negotiation of shared meanings and understanding of the world if interlocutors simply encode their own meaning without seeking to understand its relationship to that of others. (Byram et al., 1994, p. 39)

This quotation, it seems worth underscoring, comes from a book entitled Teaching-and-Learning Language-and-Culture, the hyphenation significantly suggesting a link between the last 2 concepts (1994, p. 1). The punctuation marks are in fact meant to mirror the “surge of interest” in cultural studies within the domain of language education at the time; they are “a reminder that this interest should not lead to [their] separation, either in theoretical discussion or in classroom practice” (1994, p. 1). Five years earlier, the same scholar had already stated that cultural studies had “a rightful place as part of language teaching, not just as an adjunct to language learning, not just as a means of creating better communication but as an integral component with appropriate aims and methods” (Byram, 1989, pp. 3-4). Considering

(21)

19 language use, Kramsch, in turn, claims in a similar vein that it is “indissociable from the creation and transmission of culture” (1993, p. 9). The linguist also offered to undermine the dichotomy “language versus culture” in language teaching, the latter being a feature, and not a medium, of the former (1993, p. 8).

This conception of language and culture common to Byram and Kramsch has considerably impacted on the research carried out into language education in general (e.g. Stern, 1992; Hinkel, 1999), and into ELT textbooks in particular (e.g. Cortazzi and Jin, 1999; Gray, 2010b; Vettorel, 2010). Interestingly enough, in most of these studies, such a relationship appears taken for granted and is no longer explained to readers. By way of illustration, one can notice assumptions such as “It is nowadays a commonplace in language pedagogy to stress the importance of culture teaching and to say that language and culture are intertwined” (Stern, 1992, p. 205), and “It is generally expected that second or foreign language textbooks should include elements of the target culture” (Cortazzi and Jin, 1999, p. 196). It is vital to sketch out Byram‟s and Kramsch‟s views on the language-culture connection because they are comparable to “an attack on language teaching as it [used to be] conducted in much of western Europe and North America in the post-war period” (Gray, 2010b, p. 30). As a result of their research, foreign language learning is indeed no longer regarded as the assimilation of a code, but rather as the mediation of meanings which – more importantly – deeply affects the role played by native speakers in this learning process.

3.1. Language and Culture

In 1998, Kramsch authored a book especially devoted to language and culture. To account for the link between the 2 notions, the linguist relies from the outset on the theory of linguistic relativity and the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (1998, pp. 11-14).

The former was promoted by Johann Herder and Wilhelm von Humboldt, 2 European intellectuals who lived between the 18th and the 19th centuries, and is

founded on the belief that “different people speak differently because they think differently, and that they think differently because their language offers them

(22)

20 From these thinkers was inherited the latter theory, which was developed a few decades later in the United States of America by the linguists and anthropologists Franz Boas, Edward Sapir, and Benjamin Lee Whorf (1998, p. 11). In substance, they hold the view that “the structure of the language one habitually uses influences the manner in which one thinks and behaves” (1998, p. 11). Let us point out that Kramsch opts here for the verb “influence”, typical of the weak version of this Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (1998, p. 13). The idea that language “determines” thought –

known as the strong version – is in her own terms “absurd” (1998, p. 13). The scholar furthermore advances that language is a code which results from the translation of experience (1998, p. 15; p. 127):

If speakers of different languages do not understand one another, […] [i]t is because they don‟t share the same way of viewing and interpreting events; they don‟t agree on the meaning and the value of the concepts underlying the words. In short, they don‟t cut up reality or categorize experience in the same manner. […]

[T]here are cultural differences in the semantic associations evoked by seemingly common concepts […]. The way a given language encodes experience semantically makes aspects of that experience not exclusively accessible, but just more salient for the users of that language. (1998, p. 13)

Once a social group has “a broadly agreed set of common public goals and purposes in its use of spoken and written language”, it corresponds to a “discourse community” (1998, p. 127). Belonging to a discourse community “that shares a common social space and history, and a common system of standards for perceiving, believing, evaluating, and acting” is then what defines culture (1998, p. 127). As for Byram, the scholar adopts American anthropologist Clifford Geertz‟s “symbols-and-meanings” approach to culture (1989, p. 43). The notion becomes glossed as “an historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodied in symbols, a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic form by means of which men communicate, perpetuate and develop their knowledge about and attitudes towards life” (Geertz, 1975 quoted in Byram, 1989, p. 43). Although this approach to culture is not concerned with membership of a discourse community, language – “symbolic form” – still encodes, embodies, and expresses experience (1989, pp. 42-43). In Kramsch‟s opinion, language and culture consequently form a single universe of experience (1991, p. 218). It is in order to draw attention to their inseparability that she uses the term “linguaculture” coined by Attinasi and Friedrich (1988 quoted

(23)

21 in Kramsch, 1991, p. 218). Linguaculture is precisely the reason why culture in language education cannot be conceived of as “an expendable fifth skill” besides speaking, listening, reading, and writing (Kramsch, 1993, p. 1).

While I express deep reservations about the connection between language, culture, and thought which is at the core of linguistic relativity, Kramsch and Byram‟s Humboldtian perspective on language education seems unavoidable as it is believed to be a milestone in this discipline (e.g. Hinkel, 1999, pp. 5-7; Gray, 2010b, pp. 30-34; Richards, 2014, p. 26).5 Going hand in hand with their standpoint is also a specific vision of “culture teaching” (2010b, pp. 30-34):

Traditional thought in foreign language education has limited the teaching of culture to the transmission of information about the people of the target country, and about their general attitudes and world views. […] It has usually ignored the fact that a large part of what we call culture is a social construct, the product of self and other perceptions. (Kramsch, 1993, p. 205)

The alternative which is set out is based on the key notion of interculturality (1993, pp. 205-206). Interculturality is central to the analysis of NH SB because it is one of the objectives set by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) which “provides a common basis for the elaboration of language syllabuses, curriculum guidelines, examinations, textbooks, etc. across Europe” (LPU of the Council of Europe, 2001, p. 43; p. 1). In addition, it encourages for the first time the development of a non-native cultural model in foreign language coursebooks (Gray, 2010b, p. 32, my emphasis). Needless to say, the notion is worth describing at length.

3.1.1. Culture in Language Learning

In Kramsch‟s words, understanding a foreign culture is thought to require “putting that culture in relation with one‟s own”, to depend on “a reflection both on the target [C2] and on the native culture [C1]” (1993, p. 205). In brief, language learners need to create a third perspective on C1 and C2, a “third place” where they can establish

5_{It is worth bearing in mind that the theory is still subject to debate (Gray, 2010b, pp. 27-28). For} instance, the Sapir-Whorf “hypothesis” was renamed “axiom” by American anthropologists Jane Hill and Bruce Mannheim 2 decades ago (1992, p. 383).

(24)

22 meanings which are not typically expressed by the native speakers of C2 (1993, p. 210; p. 236). Language learners, in other words, have to attempt not to accept the ready-made meanings characterising C2; they rather have to “struggle […] to find and carve out [their] own place within a speech community dominated by the myth of the native cultural speaker” (1993, pp. 236-239). Using Mikhail Bakhtin‟s polyphony theory as a starting point, Kramsch favours in this regard a dialogic educational process thanks to which learners can find “understandable and original” ways of articulating thoughts (1993, p. 27). It is in fact by means of conversations with native and non-native speakers of the language learned that students manage to discover the manners of talking and thinking which they do and do not have in common, therefore building the “third place” (1993, p. 27):

By attending both to their own agenda and to that of their interlocutors, language learners can start using the foreign language not merely as imperfect native speakers, but as speakers in their own right. It is in this development of the foreign language learner as both a social and an individual speaker that we have to see the emergence of culture in the language classroom. (1993, p. 28)

As a consequence, mastering mere communicative competence is no longer the prime goal which students are asked to achieve; it has lately become intercultural communicative competence (ICC) (Byram, 1997; Gray, 2010b, pp. 31-34). Byram, with his Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence, is unsurprisingly another exponent of this theory. Introducing ICC, the linguist concurs that “the more desirable outcome [of foreign language education]” is a learner who has “the ability to see and manage the relationships between themselves and their own cultural beliefs, behaviours and meanings, as expressed in a foreign language, and those of their interlocutors, expressed in the same language […] which may be the interlocutors‟ native language, or not” (1997, p. 12). Communicative competence represents to his mind a misleading objective as it is derived from Dell Hymes‟ analyses of first language acquisition and interaction among native speakers (1997, pp. 7-8). As a result, the implicit model to copy in foreign language education is here the native speaker, which disregards “the significance of the social identities and cultural competence of the learner in any intercultural interaction” (1997, p. 8). Byram definitely rejects this native language speaker model, not only because it is viewed as an unattainable goal, but also because it implies linguistic schizophrenia – “abandoning one language in order to blend into another linguistic environment,

(25)

23

becoming accepted as a native speaker by other native speakers” – and the acquisition of native sociocultural competence and identity (1997, pp. 11-12). In

conclusion, foreign language education should instead lead to shaping intercultural speakers who succeed in mediating between diverse languages and cultural perspectives (1997, p. 38).

After providing background information and expounding on the most influential theories revolving around foreign language education, I now turn my attention to the ELT global coursebook. More accurately, the next section of Chapter I is aimed to review the conclusions drawn by several researchers who carefully investigated its content: I first concentrate on the cultural aspects of the textbook, before addressing the issue related to the linguistic models on which it is based. What I ultimately wish to establish is that, while “ELT „sits awkwardly at the intersection of linguistics and education‟” (Edge and Richards, 1998 quoted in Gray, 2010b, p. 2), few in-depth studies of the English language taught through ELT global textbooks have so far been conducted. Interestingly enough, despite the substantial impact of Kramsch‟s and Byram‟s views of the inextricable link between language and culture on ELT, the concepts tend to be dealt with separately in coursebook analysis. Their interaction, in fact, hardly seems to have received any attention yet.

4. The ELT Global Coursebook

Lately, the ELT literature has abounded with articles and books whose focal point is the global textbook (e.g. Gray, 2000; 2002; 2010b; Kullman, 2013; Melliti, 2013; Harwood, 2014). Tomlinson, in his “Glossary of Basic Terms for Materials

Development in Language Teaching”, basically defines the concept as “[a] coursebook which is not written for learners from a particular culture or country

but which is intended for use by any class of learners in the specified level and age group anywhere in the world” (2011, xii). Bell and Gower give a far more negative description, questioning the adjective “global”. The course material is said to be

“misleadingly called” as such because it is actually a textbook designed for “a restricted number of teaching situations in many different countries rather than all

(26)

24 teaching situations in all countries” (2011, p. 137). These conflicting opinions on the global coursebook do not solely stem from the term “global”; they principally result from the scholars‟ perceptions of what a textbook is. In the first case, the coursebook is characterised as “written” and is meant to be used by language learners. Once it can be used by any learner, once it is appropriate for any teaching situation worldwide, the textbook is labelled as “global”. In the second case, the adjective has nothing to do with education. What is referred to as “global” is the commercial horizon of the coursebook, a coursebook which is first and foremost considered as a “brand” (Bell and Gower, 2011, p. 137).

As far as ELT is concerned, Bell and Gower‟s viewpoint on the global textbook turns out to be dominant. It was argued in the first section of this chapter that stress tends to be laid on the production and content poles of coursebooks in ELT research, “textbook” being more and more often associated with the terms “artefact” and “commodity” (Gray, 2013a, pp. 2-10). With regard to the word “global”, it performs the function of indicating the area of consumption of ELT coursebooks. For instance, Harwood maintains that such materials are “published in the West and marketed worldwide” (2014, p. 1, my emphasis). Under the pen of Melliti, global textbooks are

“coursebooks produced to be disseminated around the world” (2013, p. 1, my emphasis). A more detailed description of the teaching materials – which was

previously mentioned – is Gray‟s. The linguist‟s large body of work is essentially concerned with “the financially lucrative and widely disseminated UK-produced English language teaching […] „global coursebook‟, a term which refers to that genre of textbook which is produced as part of an incremental English language course designed for the global market” (2010b, p. 1, my emphasis). Echoing Bell and Gower‟s remark, Gray further adds that it is “an artefact which is predicated on the questionable assumption that „one size fits all‟ – regardless of the social, geographical and educational context of use” (2010b, p. 3). It is this assumption which deserves consideration as it is thought to determine the cultural and linguistic content of the textbook, thus the representation of English and its speakers around the world. In the following subsections, the salient features of the English-speaking community depicted in the global coursebook are surveyed.

(27)

25

4.1. The Cultural Content of ELT Global Coursebooks

At this stage of the dissertation, it may be obvious that one of the most productive scholars in ELT textbook research is John Gray. Over the past 15 years, Gray has published a large number of articles and books centred on the ELT global coursebook as a cultural artefact (e.g. 2000; 2002; 2010a; 2010b; 2012; 2013a). As a point of departure, the linguist, following in Apple‟s and Christian-Smith‟s footsteps, contends that textbooks “seek to make English mean in specific and highly selective ways” (Gray, 2010b, p. 3; see also 2000, p. 275; 2013a, p. 5). Since culture precisely corresponds to “the ways in which meanings are created, and the manner in which they subsequently circulate in society”, it is no wonder that the cultural studies perspective on coursebook analysis has been favoured in his work (2010b, p. 3). It is by adopting this approach that Gray has recently observed that the global textbook is

a carefully constructed artefact in which discourses of feminism, multiculturalism and globalization are selectively co-opted by ELT publishers as a means of inscribing English with a range of values and associations that include individualism, egalitarianism, cosmopolitanism, mobility and affluence, in which students are increasingly addressed as consumers. (2010b, p. 3)

Gray‟s body of research is particularly pertinent to my study. Firstly, his cultural studies perspective, which has turned the spotlight on the ideological composition of this category of materials, has significantly permeated the domain of ELT (e.g. Vettorel, 2010; Kullman, 2013; Melliti, 2013; Richards, 2014). Secondly, while his research is generally concerned with the global coursebooks manufactured in the United Kingdom (Gray, 2000; 2012), it has repeatedly focused on the NH series (2002; 2010b). Prior to the analysis of NH SB, it appears worth giving an overview of the topics examined by Gray and his fellow scholars – ranging from gender to neoliberalism, from work to celebrity – which characterise the NH English course more particularly. These topics, it is claimed, are selected by publishers “against a background of increasing globalization” (Gray, 2002, p. 152).

(28)

26

4.1.1. The Impact of Globalisation

It might have occurred to readers that the adjective “global” in the phrase “global coursebook” also refers to globalisation. There is undeniably a growing tendency to couple English language education with this intricate phenomenon in the ELT literature (e.g. Gray, 2002; 2010b; Gnutzmann and Intemann, 2005; Blommaert, 2010; Crystal, 2012). Gray explains in this respect

As a backdrop to my developing interest in the global coursebook as a particular kind of cultural artefact, two areas stand out as being of

importance – ongoing debates about the role of culture in ELT and modern foreign languages teaching and the ways in which language (and by extension, ELT) is intimately associated with that complex set of interrelated phenomena known as globalization. (2010b, p. 12)

Although there is no accepted definition of globalisation (Gray, 2002, pp. 152-153; 2010b, p. 13; Gnutzmann and Intemann, 2005, p. 9), it is often identified as a web of diverse processes.6 Gnutzmann and Intemann mention “global economy”, “global communication systems”, underlining the role played by the Internet, “global mass culture” represented by the brands McDonald‟s and Coca-Cola, “boundless mobility”, in addition to “world-wide travel and transport of goods” (2005, p. 9). Gray prefers to talk about “economic neoliberalism”, “increasing global interconnectedness” resulting from “technological developments”, “the ascendancy of powerful transnational corporations”, besides “flows of population, media and

ideas” (2010b, p. 13). English, they decidedly advance, is connected to these processes (Gray, 2002, pp. 153-155; 2010b, p. 16; Gnutzmann and Intemann,

2005, pp. 11-12). Nevertheless, the manner in which globalisation and English are related to each other is not unanimously agreed on. The lingua franca is described by Gnutzmann and Intemann as “a medium” of Westernisation, as “a vehicle for the spread of a culture influenced by the USA and, to a lesser extent, Western Europe” (2005, p. 11, my emphasis). Guided by Pierre Bourdieu‟s economy of linguistic exchanges and Karl Marx‟s idea of commodification, Gray rather regards English as a symbolic product of globalisation:

6_{What is at stake in this subsection is not the definition of this concept and its intricacies – to which} an entire thesis could be devoted – but primarily its concrete impact on the content of ELT global coursebooks.

(29)

27 Against this background of profound imbrication in the processes of globalization, I would suggest that it makes sense to view English both as a form of linguistic capital, capable of bringing a profit of distinction to those speakers with the ability to access it (or, more accurately, its socially legitimated varieties), and as an increasingly commodified dimension of labour-power. (2010b, pp. 16-17)

According to Bourdieu‟s theory, which will be of relevance to the next section (4.2), language is compared to capital in a market place (see Gray, 2010b, p. 15). The command of the standard variety enables its users to gain “a profit of distinction” – that is to say symbolic or material profit (Bourdieu, 1991 quoted in Gray, 2010b, p. 15). Regarding commodification, Gray clarifies in a footnote that “a language can also be packaged, imaged and sold as if it were a commodity like any other” (2010b, p. 198, his italics). The commodity in its own right which “also serves to promote English as though it too were a commodity” is in fact the UK-produced ELT global coursebook, which is thus called a “promotional commodity” (Gray, 2013a, p. 8). It is the textbook as a commodity which constitutes the point of departure for Gray‟s reflection (2000, p. 274). As the scholar puts it in one of his first articles, these global teaching materials “are sources not only of grammar, lexis, and activities for language practice, but, like Levi‟s jeans and Coca Cola, commodities which are imbued with cultural promise” – namely “the promise of entry into an international speech community which is represented in what tend to be very idealized terms” (2000, p. 274). These idealised terms portray speakers whose lifestyle is characterised by success, mobility and egalitarianism, and which has lately been diagnosed as the promotional promise of English (Gray, 2010b, p. 134). The sales pitch of the English taught through the global textbook appears to depend on deterritorialisation, inclusivity, inappropriacy, and neoliberalism.

4.1.1.1. Deterritorialisation

A recurrent comment on the content of contemporary ELT global coursebooks is linked to deterritorialisation (Gray, 2002, p. 157; 2010b, p. 109). As anticipated above, it seems that these materials are no longer solely located in Britain as international settings occur as well (2002, p. 157). Buckledee, who examined the cultural content of Straightforward Pre-intermediate, face2face Pre-intermediate,

(30)

28 and Total English Pre-intermediate, concludes that “[n]aturally, there are topics related to the British way of life, British institutions etc. but these are counterbalanced by abundant material on other countries and cultures” (2010, p. 149). In another case study, Vettorel opted for the same approach to analyse a corpus of EFL textbooks used in Italy, some of which are published on an international scale (2010, p. 162). The linguist likewise notices “a more enlarged

representation of culture”, “an opening up towards a wider view, driving away from a totally N[ative]S[peaker]-reference, target-culture perspective” (2010, p. 178). More importantly, she writes, quoting Kramsch (1993), that this fresh angle on culture contributes to the creation of personal meaning and the expression of a voice – intercultural communication (2010, pp. 178-179). Whether deterritorialisation indeed allows intercultural communication will be investigated in the case of NH SB. Along with it, egalitarianism in the NH course will be of concern.

4.1.1.2. Inclusivity

Borrowed from Gray, the word is originally glossed as guidelines on textbook content which “refe[r] to the need for a non-sexist approach to the way in which men and women are represented throughout the coursebook” (2002, p. 157). Gender, let us note, appears to have been the main focus of interest in the scholar‟s textbook analyses (2000; 2002; 2010b). In 1997, Gray did a survey of 20 English teachers‟ attitudes towards the cultural aspects of a sample of global coursebooks (2000, p. 275). Some revealed that “they had sometimes felt uncomfortable with the reading exercises” in part owing to their “sexist content” (2000, p. 276). The following conclusion reached only 5 years later by the same Gray might consequently be baffling:

Early surveys […] concluded that women were under-represented, trivialized and stereotyped in a wide selection of British and North American coursebooks. Even the most cursory look at a selection of modern global coursebooks produced in the UK shows that this is no longer the case. (2002, p. 157)

By way of example, women in the 1996 edition of NH Intermediate are “highly visible” and perform “a variety of roles” such as artist, TV presenter, and judge

(31)

29 (Gray, 2002, p. 159). The same goes for the male characters, who cook and wear aprons (2002, p. 159). British ELT global coursebooks, the linguist asserts, have been feminised (2002, p. 159; 2010b, p. 109; 2013a, pp. 5-6). By the feminising of textbook content, Gray means that “the representational practices deployed reveal the influence of feminism” (2010b, p. 109). After carrying out an autopsy on 4 global coursebooks published between 1979 and 2003, he pointed out that men and women were nowadays depicted on an egalitarian basis (2010b, p. 109). Women have become “as successful and independently minded professionals, as brave and initiative-taking individualists and as high-powered working mothers” (2010b, p. 109). Arikan‟s opinion on the 2003 NH Student’s Book differs radically (2005, p. 36). What emerges from the Turkish linguist‟s close observation of visual materials is conversely gender bias (2005, pp. 36-37). Women are said to be still under-represented, portrayed stereotypically, and predominantly linked to child-rearing (2005, p. 36). Moreover, Arikan highlights a persistently sexist job distribution (2005, p. 36). Melliti, a Tunisian scholar who investigated exactly the same textbook, shares Arikan‟s views on under-representation and stereotypes (2013, p. 6). The term “ethnocentricity” is also mentioned in his article as “the coursebook primarily foregrounds Western women in Western situations” (Melliti, 2013, p. 6). Under the heading “inclusivity”, a concept which he intentionally borrowed from Gray (2013, p. 4), Melliti chose to deal with the presence of ethnic communities in NH as well. The researcher gives damning evidence of racial bias, underscoring “the limited numbers and kinds of the roles and topics assigned for non-White minorities” (2013, p. 6). Concerning the same edition of NH, Gray simply remarks that “ten of the twelve units feature a wide range of phenotypically diverse characters” (2010b, p. 106). Of course, part of the study of NH SB will consist in settling this hotly debated question.

To Scott Thornbury‟s mind, “there is still room for improvement” as far as inclusivity is concerned (1999 quoted in Gray, 2002, p. 160). The New Zealander encouraged ELT textbook writers and publishers to insert, for example, “covert references” to homosexuality in their materials, such as “a smattering of same-sex flatmates” (1999 quoted in Gray, 2002, p. 160). His advice is nonetheless still topical. In “LGBT Invisibility and Heteronormativity in ELT Materials”, Gray looked for clues which showed sexual diversity and LGBT characters in 10

Whose English Does the New Headway Upper-Intermediate Global Coursebook Spread?

Université de Liège

Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres

Département de Langues et Littératures Modernes

Whose English Does the New Headway Upper-Intermediate

Global Coursebook Spread?

Université de Liège

Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres

Département de Langues et Littératures Modernes

Whose English Does the New Headway Upper-Intermediate

Global Coursebook Spread?

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents

Introduction

1. Background to this MA Thesis

2. Contextualising the Issue

3. Objectives and Methodology of the Research

4. Organisation of the Study

I. Literature Review

1. Introduction

2. The Textbook

3. The Language Coursebook

4. The ELT Global Coursebook